Am 09.02.2011 23:58, schrieb brett.cannon:
> brett.cannon pushed 7101df1bd817 to devguide:
> changeset: 291:7101df1bd817
> branch: hg_transition
> tag: tip
> user: Brett Cannon <brett(a)python.org>
> date: Wed Feb 09 14:58:17 2011 -0800
> Fix a silly statement.
> diff --git a/setup.rst b/setup.rst
> --- a/setup.rst
> +++ b/setup.rst
> @@ -34,8 +34,7 @@
> :abbr:`VCS`. It also means you will have better tool
> support through the VCS as it will provide a diff tool, etc.
> -To get a read-only checkout of CPython's source, you need a working copy the
> -source code. To get a read-only checkout of
> +To get a read-only checkout of
> the :ref:`in-development <indevbranch>` branch of Python, run::
> hg clone http://hg.python.org/cpython
This statement is still somewhat silly, as a) you get a clone, not a checkout
and b) it is not read only in any way: you can commit just fine. The only
difference will be the entry in .hg/hgrc pointing the default repo to something
you can't push to.
Skimming through, the whole section "Checking out the code" is still way too
SVN-point of viewy (e.g. you always get all branches anyway).
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:04 PM, giampaolo.rodola
> Author: giampaolo.rodola
> Date: Fri Feb 11 14:04:18 2011
> New Revision: 88395
> asyncore: introduce a new 'closed' attribute to make sure that dispatcher gets closed only once.
> In different occasions close() might be called more than once, causing problems with already disconnected sockets/dispatchers.
This checkin and the previous one are not appropriate for the release
candidate phase of the 3.2 release. At the very least, they need to
identify the second core dev that reviewed them, as well as a
reference to the tracker issue where the RM approved them for
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan(a)gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
I'm currently working on distutils2, and I'm trying to stop having
different informations in different places. This means using the
bugs.python.org bugtracker, instead of some weird TODO-lists in the
Two requests then:
* Is it possible to give me the rights to edit the reports for the
distutils2 component ?
* Is it possible to automatically be in the noisy list for distutils2'
bug reports ?
Tarek co-opts this.
My roundup username is "alexis".
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On behalf of the Python development team, I'm happy to announce
the third release candidate of Python 3.2.
Python 3.2 is a continuation of the efforts to improve and stabilize the
Python 3.x line. Since the final release of Python 2.7, the 2.x line
will only receive bugfixes, and new features are developed for 3.x only.
Since PEP 3003, the Moratorium on Language Changes, is in effect, there
are no changes in Python's syntax and built-in types in Python 3.2.
Development efforts concentrated on the standard library and support for
porting code to Python 3. Highlights are:
* numerous improvements to the unittest module
* PEP 3147, support for .pyc repository directories
* PEP 3149, support for version tagged dynamic libraries
* PEP 3148, a new futures library for concurrent programming
* PEP 384, a stable ABI for extension modules
* PEP 391, dictionary-based logging configuration
* an overhauled GIL implementation that reduces contention
* an extended email package that handles bytes messages
* a much improved ssl module with support for SSL contexts and certificate
* a sysconfig module to access configuration information
* additions to the shutil module, among them archive file support
* many enhancements to configparser, among them mapping protocol support
* improvements to pdb, the Python debugger
* countless fixes regarding bytes/string issues; among them full support
for a bytes environment (filenames, environment variables)
* many consistency and behavior fixes for numeric operations
For a more extensive list of changes in 3.2, see
To download Python 3.2 visit:
Please consider trying Python 3.2 with your code and reporting any bugs
you may notice to:
Georg Brandl, Release Manager
georg at python.org
(on behalf of the entire python-dev team and 3.2's contributors)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I'm one of the organizers of the Portland PSF Sprint. We've been working hard on our proposal to come up with a strong program for a full day of sprinting in Portland. The day will mostly focus on porting libraries to Python 3, hacking on PyPY 2.7 compatibility and testing. It'll be a great time so if you're in the area stop on by!
The current project list includes:- Fabric
Want to suggest your own? Use the signup sheet here.
Breakfast is being sponsored by Idealist.org, lunch is being sponsored by Emma and beverages will be made available by Urban Airship.
More information: http://goo.gl/XTMWv.
Signup sheet: http://goo.gl/a5Gqk.
I have a proposal for a literal syntax for OrderedDicts which is just
replacing the braces with square brackets:
['a': 1,'b': 2] == OrderedDict([('a', 1),('b', 2)])
OrderedDict literals would follow:
[x : x for x in foo()] == OrderedDict([(x,x) for x in foo()])
The rationale for the syntax is that it follows the set / list /
dict precedent of curly braces for unordered collections, square brackets
for ordered collections, and otherwise aping the normal dict syntax.
OrderedDict is arguable one of the best recent additions to the Python
standard library. Looking at the py3k codebase, it seems like adding
OrderedDicts as a native C implementation at the same time as introducing a
literal syntax with all the additions to the grammar and ast makes sense. A
native implementation would make the memory usage closer to normal dicts
(plus two pointers per element) but be potentially faster for many
operations than even regular dictionaries and certainly much, much faster
than the current Python-only implementation of OrderedDict.
I've started working on this in my free time, but I'm not a seasoned CPython
hacker. Any feedback or pointers would be helpful. Originally, I was
planning on creating a patch first before suggesting this to the mailing
list, but given the scope of the feature and the number of concerns I figure
I might as well test the waters first.
Even if the idea of a literal syntax is dismissed, I think a C
implementation of OrderedDict would be a great addition and I'd love to